Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Hybrid View

Eli or Ben

i want to hear who everyone would pick and why...

My argument for Eli is this.. if u put eli on the steelers i think he still gets his rings but if u put big ben on the giants i dont think he gets his rings.. also everyone says big ben then big ben that how come if he is the reason why they won their championships then how come when polamalu went down 2 years ago the whole team went down???

how come when polamalu went down 2 years ago the whole team went down???

Because the Steelers also had one of the worst special teams in the NFL that season. They lost seven games that season by a combined margin of 28 points, which is exactly the number of points the Steelers special teams allowed on kickoff returns. One fewer kickoff return TD allowed likely would have put the Steelers in the playoffs.

There was also that disturbing tendency for the defense to collapse in the fourth quarter. The Steelers had the lead entering the fourth quarter in 14 games that season, but somehow only won nine of them. This is why:

That season, the Steelers allowed more points in the fourth quarter than they did in any two other quarters combined, and only two other teams in the NFL allowed more points in the fourth quarter than the Steelers did.

And Roethlisberger had absolutely nothing to do with any of those collapses, considering he threw zero INTs in the fourth quarter that season, and the one fumble he lost in the fourth quarter was during the regular-season finale against the Dolphins, after all the damage had been done.

It's also worth noting that the Steelers finished that season with an identical record to the Giants this season. They just weren't fortunate enough to play in an overrated division. In fact, Roethlisberger has never gone to the playoffs with a record worse than 10-6. Eli, on the other hand, has taken an 8-8 team and a 9-7 team to the playoffs.

Then there's the individual comparisons. Were you aware that Roethlisberger has a better career winning percentage, completion percentage, TD percentage, INT percentage, TD/INT ratio and passer rating than Eli does, plus more yards per game and yards per attempt? Here's the list right now:

Winning percentage

Ben Roethlisberger: 80-33 (.708)
Eli Manning: 69-50 (.580)

Completion percentage

Ben Roethlisberger: 63.1%
Eli Manning: 58.4%

Yards per game

Ben Roethlisberger: 235.2
Eli Manning: 231.8

Yards per attempt

Ben Roethlisberger: 8.0
Eli Manning: 7.0

TD percentage

Ben Roethlisberger: 5.0%
Eli Manning: 4.7%

INT percentage

Ben Roethlisberger: 3.0%
Eli Manning: 3.3%

TD/INT ratio

Ben Roethlisberger: 1.65
Eli Manning: 1.43

Passer rating

Ben Roethlisberger: 92.1
Eli Manning: 82.1

Eli has generally played better in the Super Bowl than Roethlisberger has, but that's where it stops for him. Even then, the Super Bowl is but one element in a QB's entire body of work, and performance therein might not necessarily be a good indicator of anything, considering Jim Plunkett has a better Super Bowl aggregate than Jim Kelly.

On a side note, I really don't appreciate the way non-Steeler fans are already trying to marginalize Roethlisberger's performance in Super Bowl XLIII. He played as well as any QB would have, given the complete lack of help by anybody else on offense not named Santonio Holmes or Heath Miller. The running game was a non-factor (58 yards, 2.2 YPC), and the starting C and RG were both out of football within a year (not due to old age either). Furthermore, their average starting field position was their own 23-yard line, and they didn't have a scoring drive shorter than 69 yards.

And Eli has benefited from a good defense just as much as Roethlisberger has. Consider these combined statistical averages from Eli's 2007 and 2011 post-seasons, and Roethlisberger's 2005, 2008 and 2010 post-seasons:

Points allowed per game

Giants: 14.9
Steelers: 17.9

Yards allowed per game

Giants: 307.1
Steelers: 298.4

Takeaways per game

Giants: 1.8
Steelers: 1.9

The Giants have had a more efficient running game during their Super Bowl runs as well.

Yards per carry

Giants: 3.8
Steelers: 3.5

And yet, the Steelers have been more productive at scoring during their Super Bowl runs.

Points per game

Giants: 23.1
Steelers: 24.4

NOTE: Points allowed per game factors out all points scored by opposing defenses or special teams. Points per game factors out all points scored by each team's defense or special teams.

Basically, I believe that Eli Manning has earned some respect, but I also believe that Ben Roethlisberger has earned more respect than he's gotten. Furthermore, either both QBs are "elite," or neither of them are. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say that Eli is elite but Roethlisberger is not, or vice versa. The Steelers and Giants have both found the franchise QBs they've needed in order to be consistent Super Bowl contenders, and it's perfectly acceptable for neither fan base to desire the other's QB more than their own.

"He’s the most underrated quarterback of the 21st century."

-Bill Simmons (Editor, Grantland) discussing Ben Roethlisberger

"Roethlisberger is perpetually underrated, to the point that even when he breaks records, it doesn’t really feel like it."

-Joseph Milord (Editor, Elite Daily)

HEY, REMEMBER BACK WHEN THE STEELERS SCORED 436 POINTS IN A SEASON WITH BRUCE ARIANS AS THEIR OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR? YEAH, ME NEITHER. *LMAO*

My argument for Eli is this.. if u put eli on the steelers i think he still gets his rings but if u put big ben on the giants i dont think he gets his rings.. also everyone says big ben then big ben that how come if he is the reason why they won their championships then how come when polamalu went down 2 years ago the whole team went down???

state ur arguments

Because Troy Polamalu was the best player in football. What is your point?

Come on Wade>Kobe, don't you know that facts and abstract thought are not acceptable when discussing Eli? You have to contradict yourself and say 2010's bad year was a fluke but 2011's great year was not. You have to be narrow-sighted and say that the reigning Super Bowl champion is one of the best. And you can't compare him to other quarterbacks, you can only say that 4,000 yard seasons are accomplishments which puts him in the top 5 and ignore the 6-7 other quarterbacks who have been better and more consistent in that span.

And none of what you said disproved the OP's genius point about how Eli would still have success on the Steelers whereas Roethlisberger would not on the Giants. Not sure how that makes sense since Eli is less mobile and would be playing behind a worse offensive line in Pittsburgh, and Roethlisberger would have better and more experienced receivers in New York, but who cares about making sense?

Come on Wade>Kobe, don't you know that facts and abstract thought are not acceptable when discussing Eli? You have to contradict yourself and say 2010's bad year was a fluke but 2011's great year was not. You have to be narrow-sighted and say that the reigning Super Bowl champion is one of the best. And you can't compare him to other quarterbacks, you can only say that 4,000 yard seasons are accomplishments which puts him in the top 5 and ignore the 6-7 other quarterbacks who have been better and more consistent in that span.

And none of what you said disproved the OP's genius point about how Eli would still have success on the Steelers whereas Roethlisberger would not on the Giants. Not sure how that makes sense since Eli is less mobile and would be playing behind a worse offensive line in Pittsburgh, and Roethlisberger would have better and more experienced receivers in New York, but who cares about making sense?

lol you still use Eli's 2010 against him after the 20 game performance he put on this past season. If you are going to look at his 2010 season, mine as well look at the season once before as well, which was arguably just as good as 2011 season. Eli has thrown 10, 14, 25, 16 INTs the last 4 seasons and you just cant admit 25 was a FLUKE.

I dont have a problem with somebody saying Big Ben is slightly better then Eli, although I would be surprised if Ben puts up better stats then Eli does next year, but to act like 2010 wasn't a fluke is just ********.

lol you still use Eli's 2010 against him after the 20 game performance he put on this past season. If you are going to look at his 2010 season, mine as well look at the season once before as well, which was arguably just as good as 2011 season. Eli has thrown 10, 14, 25, 16 INTs the last 4 seasons and you just cant admit 25 was a FLUKE.

I dont have a problem with somebody saying Big Ben is slightly better then Eli, although I would be surprised if Ben puts up better stats then Eli does next year, but to act like 2010 wasn't a fluke is just ********.

I want to precede my response by saying we're in agreement, of sorts. You don't have a problem when someone says Roethlisberger is slightly better than Eli when that's what I say he is, only slightly better. It's not a photo finish, but it's not like Roethlisberger lapped Eli or anything like that.

Anyway, what will it take for you to realize that everyone is talking about total turnovers, including fumbles, not just interceptions? Literally every time someone says 2010 wasn't a fluke, you bring up his interceptions numbers and how they were lower the previous years. To which I respond, literally every time, with his total turnover numbers. He went from 22 turnovers in 2009 to 30 in 2010 to 20 this past season. A jump, but not a hugely significant one warranting a "fluke" label. Going from 27 turnovers in 2007 to 12 in 2008 then back to 22 in 2009, now that can be called a fluke. Like I asked, what will it take for you to finally understand that? I just want you to finally get caught up with the rest of us so that we don't have this interaction again.

"Eli had lots of turnovers."
"It was a fluke because he had less interceptions in previous years."
"Are you ********? I said turnovers."
"He had less interceptions!"
"Yeah, you're ********."

Maybe now you finally learned? Took a few tries but I'm hoping against hope that you've caught up with the rest of us.

But actually, I wasn't exactly saying 2010 was a fluke. I was calling you and other Giants fans out for calling the bad 2010 a fluke but saying the good 2011 was not. It's just a contradiction and hypocritical and doesn't make any of you seem very smart.

Anyway, what will it take for you to realize that everyone is talking about total turnovers, including fumbles, not just interceptions? Literally every time someone says 2010 wasn't a fluke, you bring up his interceptions numbers and how they were lower the previous years. To which I respond, literally every time, with his total turnover numbers. He went from 22 turnovers in 2009 to 30 in 2010 to 20 this past season. A jump, but not a hugely significant one warranting a "fluke" label. Going from 27 turnovers in 2007 to 12 in 2008 then back to 22 in 2009, now that can be called a fluke. Like I asked, what will it take for you to finally understand that? I just want you to finally get caught up with the rest of us so that we don't have this interaction again.

But actually, I wasn't exactly saying 2010 was a fluke. I was calling you and other Giants fans out for calling the bad 2010 a fluke but saying the good 2011 was not. It's just a contradiction and hypocritical and doesn't make any of you seem very smart.

I mean, what are Roethlisbergers TO #'s by year. You show Eli's Turnover's but not Roethlisberger's so that we assume Eli's are way higher. I bet they're higher, but by how much?

2011: 19 TO's
2008: 22 TO's
2006: 25 TO's

Now does he turn the ball over less than Eli? Yes, but you can see he's had some years with TO rates every bit as much as Eli.

I mean, just last year Eli had 1 more TO than Roethlisberger, and I think Roethlisberger played 1 less game.

Well, I personally think Eli is better right now, but it has nothing to do with the reason the OP stated. I'm not sure what Polamalu has to do with this argument.

You should all know my reasons for thinking why Eli is better...I have stated my case several times, but overall I think its basically a toss up between these two guys.

Steelers fans are gonna say they would rather have Big Ben. Giants fans are gonna say they would rather have Eli.

My personal opinion is that Ben has been more consistent throughout his career, but Eli is playing at a slightly higher level at this moment, and I have no reason to believe that Eli won't continue to play at this level going forward...So I'm taking Eli slightly over Ben going into next season.

Is this a subjective opinion...sure it is. But, I think these two Qbs are way too close at this point in their careers to nitpick at what you believe is an objective measure of ranking these two guys. For me its simple...I think Eli is playing a little bit better at the moment, and I believe that going into next season, Eli Manning gives you a slightly better chance to win a SB.

Last edited by Wrigheyes4MVP; 03-05-2012 at 01:05 PM.

DUDA

Originally Posted by VendettaRed07

noah is gonna be a beast man.

with him and harvey, its like were gonna have Goku and Vegetta in the same rotation